Drugs in Society: European Perspectives. Edited by Jane Fountain & Dirk J Korf. Radcliffe. 2007. £19.95 (pb). 160pp. ISBN 9781846190933

Made up of a collection of papers based on qualitative research in several European countries, this book seeks to illustrate and comment on drug use as a dynamic social behaviour influenced by personal, cultural and political factors. The contributors and editors are all members of the European Society for Social Research on Drugs, a group whose aim is to promote social science approaches to drug research.

The ten papers included tackle a range of subjects and present research in a different way to that which clinicians are accustomed to. Many of the chapters elaborate on the variation in social perceptions and meaning of drug use depending upon the societal context, with stigma and the marginalisation of drug users being a common theme throughout. This is expanded further with reference to motivation and meaning behind drug use in particular cultures and the need for culturally sensitive treatment services. Controversial questions are posed regarding the interaction between public opinion, political view and subsequent drug policy and there are interesting discussions regarding the influence of media and clinical research in shaping opinion.

What the book amounts to is largely a collection of opinions and hypotheses where often the evidence that is quoted, and claimed to be systematic, is ill-defined. There is little attempt to undertake the practice, as in traditional scientific papers, of clearly describing methodology and critically discussing models and conclusions. This is the book's major flaw in that it is difficult to consider its assertions critically without the transparency that it claims other clinical research lacks.

Unfortunately, there are obvious factual inaccuracies that lead one to question the credibility of the book, making it even more difficult to know how to regard the conclusions drawn. For example, there is reference to the practice of prescribing oral heroin as a maintenance treatment in the UK, which is clearly not the case, yet the widespread use of oral buprenorphine was omitted.

Beyond the social science field, I question who the target audience for this book is. It attempts to challenge what it views as the black and white medical model of research and policy by putting forward equally monochrome opinions with little supporting evidence. It did, however, succeed in its aim of being provocative and challenging to the reader.